Forum talk:It is time to organize
If forums are better for discussing my suggestions, please move this text there. If you spot some need for correcting the grammar, please feel free to do it as well. Thanks.--HAK 03:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC) How do we define America? Regarding the Point #1 concerning the Future of the United States of America in the XXI Century, my main question is a simple and direct one. How do we define "America"? Is America a "Cultural Phenomenon" and if so, does "culture" transcend Nation-State boundaries? If Cultural Empire is what we are truly talking about in defining America, do we define such a Cultural Empire along linguistic boundaries? If so, then Canada and the United States are the likely Cultural Empire that we are speaking of, and indeed, our historically "open borders" with Canada would point towards such an Empire already existing. If Cultural Empire is defined in other ways, then what would this Empire consist of? If defined by economic prosperity, then again Canada and the U.S. would be joined, along with the highly prosperous European Union, and perhaps also Japan, as one combined, techno-Empire united by Coca-Cola, blue jeans and Microsoft. Finally, as a self-avowed Theocrat, my unity is in Jesus Christ, and although my allegiance to defend the Constitution of the United States is a commitment, when evaluated from a Christian perspective, such an allegiance can only be held as secondary to my primary allegiance to Jesus Christ who is KING of kings, and LORD of lords. As such, my Cultural Empire, rather than being linguistic (U.S.-Canada) or financial (U.S.-E.U.-Japan) is instead marked by the geographical areas containing the highest concentrations of practicing Christians, namely the United States, Latin America and Africa. How then are we to define America? Are we simply the pre-existing 50 United States or are we a Cultural Empire, and if so, then how would such an Empire be defined?--RobJKing 20:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)Pro Deo et Patria, Rob J King, Republican Political Voice :I'm going to reject the term Empire completely. If people want to build a community of people, or a community of nations, that's fine. But we've dealt with the abuses of Empire for 7,000 years, and I personally have had enough. :I define America as the promise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It doesn't depend on national borders, and goes beyond the Western Hemisphere, as I know that people in South America consider themselves 'Americans' as much as we do because both continents were designated as the discovery of Amerigo Vespucci by the map maker Martin Waldseemüller in 1507. Those citizens of the US who try to claim the term for a single country are being selfish not just with a single word in a single language, but selfish of the promise that the founding of the US meant, or should mean, to the entire world. :Part of that promise is the ideal of the rule of law. Some people would consider regulations and limitations on business to be an abuse of law, and would prefer that they all be repealled. I simply say in response that liberty does not come about by the absense of law, which is a definition of anarchy and chaos. True liberty is the result of the adherance to good law that defines and defends individual rights and provides a foundation, via the investment of time, work and capital of all the people subject to the law, to make sure that the opportunity to reach our potential is available to everyone. :This is not dependent on any particular faith, or even on any family of faiths. It is based on shared values and a system of ethics that are maintained by that rule of law. Chadlupkes 20:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC) fundamental agreement with Western Hemisphere cartography Chad, All that you write I am in fundamental agreement with. First, yes, Empires generally have resulted in HORRIFIC disparity in resources, very often based solely upon the color of one's skin. Take the example of the British Empire. Mohandas K Gandhi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi was an extremely well-educated citizen of the British "Christian" Empire, yet, due to his dark complexion, during his historic early years in South Africa was treated as nothing more than a third-class citizen by supposedly Christian Afrikaaner and British Imperialists. I too am against such an empire. Second, I agree with your characterization of the Western Hemisphere as one combined geo-political reality, and yes, as defined by cartographer Amerigo Vespucci. As someone who is half-Hispanic (mother born in Puerto Rico), I can conceive of "America" ONLY in such hemispheric terms. Thank you as usual for the clarity of your thought. My primary commitment is as a Christian, and thus engaged in the work of salvation, BUT to the extent that Christians are also vitally concerned with the societal common good (granted more of Catholic Social Thought directive), I see it as my responsibilty to do everything possible to see the local community, state association, and the federal government working as smoothly as possible. Therefore, as a Christian, I am committed to working alongside of all citizens of the American Republic to insure the highest quality of life, everything from insuring clean water to maintaining a strong national defense. Again, thank you. Blessings in Jesus, Rob J King--RobJKing 21:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)Pro-Life Political Voice